Taking control of the Order Paper

In recent days, MPs and commentators have referred to backbenchers ‘taking control of the Order Paper’ in the House of Commons. But what does ‘taking control of the Order Paper’ mean, and why is this mechanism being attempted?

The default rule: Standing Order No. 14

In the House of Commons ‘precedence’ (or ‘priority’) is given on every sitting day to business tabled by the government. This default rule is set out in Standing Order No. 14(1).

Although other MPs can table substantive motions, this rule means they are unlikely to get time for debate. Even if there is not very much government business, the time can be filled with (unamendable) motions on general debates on subjects of the government’s choosing.

The exceptions to the rule

There are, however, three important exceptions to this general rule included in the standing orders:

• On 20 days per session, opposition business is given priority in the Commons Chamber
• On 27 days per session, backbench business is given priority in the Commons Chamber
• On 13 Fridays per session, private members’ bills are given priority in the Commons Chamber

The standing orders limit the type of business that can be considered on these days. They do not afford much flexibility to hold complex deliberative exercises (like indicative votes) or to pass primary legislation against the government’s wishes.

For all practical purposes, therefore, an MP wishing to do any of those things will need to create a distinct exception to the default rules of the House.

Why is it difficult to take control of the Order Paper?

If a majority of MPs can agree, all that is needed to override the precedence of government business is an order of the House of Commons. However, the opportunities to vote on a motion that could become an order are limited.

Backbench business motions cannot be used to modify Standing Order No. 14.

Opposition days can (theoretically) be used to amend the standing order, but the government is not obliged to grant an opposition day for a particular date.

How have MPs ‘taken control of the Order Paper’ in the past?

On 25 March 2019, the government moved an amendable motion on its proposed ‘next steps’ for Brexit. This requirement was triggered under the EU (Withdrawal) Act 2018, when the Commons rejected the government’s deal in a ‘meaningful vote’.

Oliver Letwin (Con) proposed an amendment to the government’s motion. That amendment was approved by the House. The final order set aside a future sitting day – 27 March 2019 – during which the rule in Standing Order 14(1) would be (temporarily) overridden. Priority was instead given to a backbench Business of the House motion and a series of Brexit motions. A day on which such a Business of the House motion takes priority is hereafter referred to as a ‘Letwin day’.

On 27 March 2019, the Business of the House motion was approved. This meant the House could then debate and vote on certain items of business, including proposed legislation, against the government’s wishes.

How have MPs previously used their control of the Order Paper?

The use of the first ‘Letwin day’ was determined by the Business of the House order of 27 March 2019. It set the rules for the first indicative votes exercise and enabled further “Letwin days” to be set aside for other backbench initiatives.

The ‘daisy-chaining’ of ‘Letwin days’ (whereby approving one business motion sets aside a day to consider another business motion, and so on) eventually allowed the Commons to consider and approve a private member’s bill. A bill sponsored by Yvette Cooper (Lab), who was then in opposition, became the EU (Withdrawal) Act 2019, against the government’s wishes, and compelled the then Prime Minister, Theresa May, to seek an extension of Article 50.

Analysis

Sustaining support for taking or maintaining control of the Order Paper is a sophisticated political exercise. It is one that can be ended abruptly if, at any point, MPs conclude the default rules should be retained or reinstated.

At least three considerations appear to have influenced how MPs voted on key ‘Letwin day’ votes:

• how clear the purpose was for which the ‘Letwin day’ was being sought
• how urgent and desirable the business that was to be debated was perceived to be
• how likely and desirable it was that further days subsequently may be set aside for as yet undisclosed purposes